So long as the idiots in Washington think that ISIS is a band of people this will never end. When they accept that ISIS is a political and religious ideology, only then will progress be made. So, never.

stir22:So long as the idiots in Washington think that ISIS is a band of people this will never end. When they accept that ISIS is a political and religious ideology, only then will progress be made. So, never.

As soon as they grasp it's an ideology they'll start pushing democratization and nation building which for many means pushing Christianity. We dropped the term Global War on Terrorism when we figured out it would never end but quickly relabel the fight as needed.

The KKK doesn't have any territory, either. Have they been "defeated?" Oh sure, they're less dangerous than ISIS by a damn sight. And to the extent that that's true, it's because we treated the cause rather than the symptoms.

I mean, don't get me wrong, we did a PROFOUNDLY shiatty job of treating the cause of the KKK. But we did at least do something other than drop bombs on people who looked like they might be vaguely Klan-affiliated from 4,000 miles away.

Call me when ISIS is as dangerous as the Klan. Which, again, will still be far too farking dangerous, but at least it'll be a meaningful benchmark.

I guess, in the same way Russia defeated the mujahideen, or Britain defeated the IRA, or France defeated the FLA or all the insurgencies since time began.

The state can kill most of the terrorists, jail the rest, crush the revolt--but unless the underlying REASON for the insurgency is addressed, like it was in Algeria and wasn't in Afghanistan, the insurgency will eventually grow back.

ltnor:Did Russia stop funding them? Has the ideology changed? No? Then they aren't going anywhere. They might go underground for a bit to regroup and even go by a different name, but it isn't going away.

How in the fark could you be stupid enough to think Russia is funding ISIS?

You know who's funding ISIS? Illegal oilSmuggling (when they had a border with Turkey) and Rich Sunni Muslims making donations through Qatar:

ColonelCathcart:ltnor: Did Russia stop funding them? Has the ideology changed? No? Then they aren't going anywhere. They might go underground for a bit to regroup and even go by a different name, but it isn't going away.

How in the fark could you be stupid enough to think Russia is funding ISIS?

You know who's funding ISIS? Illegal oilSmuggling (when they had a border with Turkey) and Rich Sunni Muslims making donations through Qatar:

Still won't matter. These people have been fighting since BEFORE Christ! It's all they know.Even if they got 100% of what they wanted, they would STILL fight. It's tribal, and always willbe unless you rid the entire planet of them, and, considering how they reproduce, that won't happen.

They may kill 'Islamic Assholes™ but that just gives freedom to a whole bunch of freelance assassins.

As Gyrfalcon says:The state can kill most of the terrorists, jail the rest, crush the revolt--but unless the underlying REASON for the insurgency is addressed, like it was in Algeria and wasn't in Afghanistan, the insurgency will eventually grow back.

/How do you kill a God..or two?//the only real way to kill the religious wars that have plagued us since Deep in the BCE///Start with the commandments...

I am Tom Joad's Complete Lack of Surprise:ColonelCathcart: ltnor: Did Russia stop funding them? Has the ideology changed? No? Then they aren't going anywhere. They might go underground for a bit to regroup and even go by a different name, but it isn't going away.

How in the fark could you be stupid enough to think Russia is funding ISIS?

You know who's funding ISIS? Illegal oilSmuggling (when they had a border with Turkey) and Rich Sunni Muslims making donations through Qatar:

ColonelCathcart:ltnor: Did Russia stop funding them? Has the ideology changed? No? Then they aren't going anywhere. They might go underground for a bit to regroup and even go by a different name, but it isn't going away.

How in the fark could you be stupid enough to think Russia is funding ISIS?

You know who's funding ISIS? Illegal oilSmuggling (when they had a border with Turkey) and Rich Sunni Muslims making donations through Qatar:

sorry, are you arguing that assad didn't use isis to taint other syrians trying to move their country past assad?

I concede the point that ISIS (and Al-Nusra and Tahrir Al-Sham) we're used to paint the limited democratic opposition as terrorists, but that the actual terrorists were fighting them too.

The bad news is that by 2016 there was little, if any, non-Islamist opposition to Assad other than the Kurds. (Some of) The Kurds and Assad have been playing nice and dividing the country among themselves and even share control of Qamishili and Aleppo.

My point is that the terrorists did a great job of self-funding and didn't need any help from Russia (other than allowing Chechens to leave the country to make it easier to note which were terrorists and to also fight them abroad and not at home).

ltnor:Did Russia stop funding them? Has the ideology changed? No? Then they aren't going anywhere. They might go underground for a bit to regroup and even go by a different name, but it isn't going away.

Give the Russians some credit for intelligence. They've learned the hard way that funding Sunni extremists only turns around and bites them in the Caucasus.

ColonelCathcart:I concede the point that ISIS (and Al-Nusra and Tahrir Al-Sham) we're used to paint the limited democratic opposition as terrorists, but that the actual terrorists were fighting them too.

The bad news is that by 2016 there was little, if any, non-Islamist opposition to Assad other than the Kurds. (Some of) The Kurds and Assad have been playing nice and dividing the country among themselves and even share control of Qamishili and Aleppo.

My point is that the terrorists did a great job of self-funding and didn't need any help from Russia (other than allowing Chechens to leave the country to make it easier to note which were terrorists and to also fight them abroad and not at home).

Also, the Russians used Chechens to infiltrate ISIS as well.

from a chapter in the recently published and much lauded 'The Syrian Uprising':

Over the decades the Syrian regime manipulated ethnic and sectarian cleavages to maintain its rule ... At the same time, although discussions of sectarianism were totally banned from public debate, accusations of instigating sectarian tensions were part of a political discourse adopted by the regime to criminalize dissent and as part of its claim that only an authoritarian regime was capable of preserving the complex mosaic of Syrian society from sedition and sectarian chaos (Dibo 2014).

Bashar al-Asad's role in actually fomenting sectarianism in the early period of the Uprising was part of what Frederic C Hof (2013) called the regime's 'sectarian survival strategy.' It time to undermine the legitimacy of the popular Uprising by portraying the demonstrators as foreign-backed takfiris and terrorists and to raise the spectre of sectarian strife in order to present itself as the sole guarantor of Syria's national unity and social fabric.

Indeed, the articulation of the regime discourse passed through a number of distinct phases (Slyer 2012) ... etc ... etc ... etc ...

etc ...

The survival of the al-Asad regime largely depended on the credibility of its sectarian argument ... etc ... etc ... etc ...

21-7-b:ColonelCathcart: I concede the point that ISIS (and Al-Nusra and Tahrir Al-Sham) we're used to paint the limited democratic opposition as terrorists, but that the actual terrorists were fighting them too.

The bad news is that by 2016 there was little, if any, non-Islamist opposition to Assad other than the Kurds. (Some of) The Kurds and Assad have been playing nice and dividing the country among themselves and even share control of Qamishili and Aleppo.

My point is that the terrorists did a great job of self-funding and didn't need any help from Russia (other than allowing Chechens to leave the country to make it easier to note which were terrorists and to also fight them abroad and not at home).

Also, the Russians used Chechens to infiltrate ISIS as well.

from a chapter in the recently published and much lauded 'The Syrian Uprising':

Over the decades the Syrian regime manipulated ethnic and sectarian cleavages to maintain its rule ... At the same time, although discussions of sectarianism were totally banned from public debate, accusations of instigating sectarian tensions were part of a political discourse adopted by the regime to criminalize dissent and as part of its claim that only an authoritarian regime was capable of preserving the complex mosaic of Syrian society from sedition and sectarian chaos (Dibo 2014).

Bashar al-Asad's role in actually fomenting sectarianism in the early period of the Uprising was part of what Frederic C Hof (2013) called the regime's 'sectarian survival strategy.' It time to undermine the legitimacy of the popular Uprising by portraying the demonstrators as foreign-backed takfiris and terrorists and to raise the spectre of sectarian strife in order to present itself as the sole guarantor of Syria's national unity and social fabric.

Indeed, the articulation of the regime discourse passed through a number of distinct phases (Slyer 2012) ... etc ... etc ... etc ...

etc ...

The survival of the al-Asad regime largely depended on the credibility of its sectarian argument ... etc ... etc ... etc ...

Assad replies, "I learned it from you, old chap and mon frer"

The British and French were doing the sectarian dividing of Syria long before it was cool:

stir22:So long as the idiots in Washington think that ISIS is a band of people this will never end. When they accept that ISIS is a political and religious ideology, only then will progress be made. So, never.

21-7-b:ColonelCathcart: Assad replies, "I learned it from you, old chap and mon frer"

The British and French were doing the sectarian dividing of Syria long before it was cool:

https://www.mepc.org/troubles-syria-sp​awned-french-divide-and-rule

at least you tried to create a false narrative before going for the whataboutism this time.

It's not whatabboutism if it literally sets the stage for the modern divisions within Syria.

But nice.

"False narrative" (internecine fighting among Syrians led to the destruction of the moderate opposition as much as Assad) and "whatabboutism" (The Brits and French exploited these divisions for generations).

Nothing I wrote is wrong. You're just mad that your side lost, and is continuing to lose everywhere it sticks it's nose.

Russia managed to defeat ISIS with minimal investment and even managed to turn it into arms sales that probably paid for the intervention.

ColonelCathcart:It's not whatabboutism if it literally sets the stage for the modern divisions within Syria.

But nice.

"False narrative" (internecine fighting among Syrians led to the destruction of the moderate opposition as much as Assad) and "whatabboutism" (The Brits and French exploited these divisions for generations).

Nothing I wrote is wrong. You're just mad that your side lost, and is continuing to lose everywhere it sticks it's nose.

Russia managed to defeat ISIS with minimal investment and even managed to turn it into arms sales that probably paid for the intervention.

Millions of Syrians are thankful. Get over it. Your terrorists lost

whatbaoutism, from wiki, for you

Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which in the United States is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

the argument you were 'defending' was: 'That is a far cry from [russia] supporting them financially or otherwise.'

p51d007:Still won't matter. These people have been fighting since BEFORE Christ! It's all they know.Even if they got 100% of what they wanted, they would STILL fight. It's tribal, and always willbe unless you rid the entire planet of them, and, considering how they reproduce, that won't happen.

I'm not sure the Sumerians/Babylonians/Akkadians/Etc were bloodthirsty enough in comparison to their contemporaries to warrant that sort of anger.

21-7-b:ColonelCathcart: It's not whatabboutism if it literally sets the stage for the modern divisions within Syria.

But nice.

"False narrative" (internecine fighting among Syrians led to the destruction of the moderate opposition as much as Assad) and "whatabboutism" (The Brits and French exploited these divisions for generations).

Nothing I wrote is wrong. You're just mad that your side lost, and is continuing to lose everywhere it sticks it's nose.

Russia managed to defeat ISIS with minimal investment and even managed to turn it into arms sales that probably paid for the intervention.

Millions of Syrians are thankful. Get over it. Your terrorists lost

whatbaoutism, from wiki, for you

Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which in the United States is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.

the argument you were 'defending' was: 'That is a far cry from [russia] supporting them financially or otherwise.'